Approach, Sampling, and Analysis

This study employs qualitative comparative content analysis to investigate the representations of Ukrainian refugees and refugees from the MENA region within Western media and political narratives. The comparative analysis is designed to identify and contrast the similarities and differences in how these two groups of refugees are portrayed, revealing underlying biases, hierarchies, and systemic inequalities within refugee and migration discourses.

To ensure a diverse and comprehensive dataset, the media sources were systematically selected based on the following criteria: the prominence of the media outlets (e.g., major news organizations with significant reach and influence), geographical spread, and political diversity. Political statements were similarly chosen from speeches and official communications by policymakers across Western countries.

The media texts and political speeches were predominantly collected over a defined period from January 2022 to December 2023, a timeframe that captures a significant rise in refugee-related discourse, coinciding with the start of the Ukraine war in February 2022 and its subsequent impact on global refugee politics. This period was selected to ensure that the analysis covered a time of heightened attention to Ukrainian refugees, allowing for a meaningful comparison of how this group was discussed during a period of high media and political focus.

In addition to the media and political text analysis, semi-structured interviews were conducted throughout 2023 with 10 media professionals from the MENA region and 8 political analysts from Europe and the MENA region. These participants were selected based on their expertise in refugee-related issues, their involvement in media representation, and their knowledge of broader EU refugee policymaking. The semi-structured format allowed for an in-depth exploration of their insights and experiences, providing rich qualitative data that complements the content analysis of media and political texts. Interviews were conducted both in person and online, depending on participant availability.

A clear breakdown of the number of articles analyzed and the interviews conducted can be found in the tables below. The media articles were selected to ensure a diversity of perspectives, including various geographic regions, political leanings, and reach. These outlets were chosen because of their prominent role in shaping public opinion about refugees during the specified periods.

Table 1. List of media sources consulted

Table 2. Profiles of key informants and experts interviewed

The analysis employed qualitative comparative content analysis to systematically code and examine the data. The coding process involved both open coding and theoretical coding. Initially, open coding was used to identify recurring themes and discursive patterns directly from the media texts and interviews, allowing key themes to emerge organically from the data. This was followed by theoretical coding, where the emerging themes were aligned with existing theoretical frameworks on media representation, refugee discourses, and systemic inequality (Corbin & Strauss Reference Corbin and Strauss2015; Braun & Clarke Reference Braun and Clarke2006).

To clarify, coding in this study refers to the systematic categorization of the media content, political statements, and interview transcripts. Each unit of analysis (whether a media article, political speech, or interview response) was assigned codes based on identified themes, such as portrayals of victimhood, heroism, criminality, or economic burden. These codes were then grouped into broader categories, allowing for a structured comparison between the representations of Ukrainian refugees and refugees from the MENA region.

The thematic analysis of media content and political statements was complemented by the thematic coding of interview data. The responses from the interviewees were analyzed to provide contextual insights and to confirm or challenge patterns identified in the media texts. By juxtaposing the depictions of Ukrainian refugees with those from the MENA region, this methodological approach provides a nuanced understanding of how biases and inequities in refugee discourses are constructed and maintained.

This multi-layered approach allows for a comprehensive analysis of how different refugee groups are portrayed in the media and political narratives, as well as the broader implications for international responses to refugee crises. The findings contribute to a deeper understanding of systemic inequalities within global refugee policies. This approach builds on established methodologies for qualitative content analysis and thematic coding (Corbin & Strauss Reference Corbin and Strauss2015; Braun & Clarke Reference Braun and Clarke2006). It also draws from previous research on refugee representation and media discourses (Holmes & Castañeda Reference Holmes and Castañeda2016; Czachur & Smykała Reference Czachur, Smykała and Fábián2023; Fuller Reference Fuller2024), positioning this study within a broader scholarly context of media analysis and refugee studies.

Working Definitions

This paper employs the UNHCR’s definitions of “refugees” and “migrants” to clarify the distinctions between these two groups. According to UNHCR, a migrant is someone who “chooses to move, not because of a direct threat of persecution or death, but primarily to improve their life through better work opportunities, education, family reunification, or other personal reasons. Unlike refugees, migrants do not face significant barriers to returning to their home country” (UNHCR 2022).

In contrast, a refugee is someone who “has been forced to flee their home country due to persecution, war, or violence. Refugees have a well-founded fear of persecution based on race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or membership in a particular social group (Ibid). For them, returning home is either impossible or would put their lives at serious risk. The main drivers of such displacement include war, as well as ethnic, tribal, and religious violence” (Ibid).

Refugees are recognized and protected under international law, with the 1951 Refugee Convention, its 1967 Protocol, and other legal instruments like the 1969 OAU Refugee Convention serving as the foundation for modern refugee protection (Feller et al Reference Feller, Türk and Nicholson2003). According to UNHCR, this legal distinction is crucial for individual governments, as migrants, unlike refugees, are not protected under international law and are subject to the immigration laws and processes of the countries they seek to enter. There remains a concerning history of governments manipulating these definitions to evade their responsibilities toward refugees. By labeling those fleeing persecution as “migrants,” many governments attempt to diminish their legal obligations and justify restrictive policies. This manipulation undermines the international protection framework and leaves vulnerable populations at greater risk.

Having said that, the paper additionally positions itself around the pretense that the very concept of a “refugee” is deeply intertwined with colonial logic (Abuya et al Reference Abuya, Krause and Mayblin2021). The modern refugee regime, established primarily by Western powers, reflects the colonial mindset that prioritizes the needs and interests of the Global North over those of the Global South. The classification and treatment of refugees have historically been influenced by colonial power dynamics, where the Global North determines who is deserving of protection and under what conditions (Ibid). This colonial legacy continues to shape the uneven application of refugee protections and the global response to displacement, often to the detriment of those most affected by violence and persecution.

On Selectivity and Racist Undertones

Various studies have shed light on the framing of asylum seekers and refugees in mainstream media, revealing distinct patterns shaped by ideological leanings and geographical proximity to conflict regions. For instance, a quantitative content analysis (Blumel et al Reference Blumel, Bunce, Cooper and McDowell2019) indicated that left-leaning newspapers tend to portray refugees as victims, whereas right-leaning publications often depict them as criminals. Studies on refugee coverage in European countries such as Hungary, Germany, Sweden, the UK, and Spain (Heidenreich et al Reference Heidenreich, Lind, Eberl and Boomgaardenm2019), as well as in Germany specifically (Holzberg, Kolbe & Zaborowski Reference Holzberg, Kolbe and Zaborowski2018), emphasized the recurring theme of border control, particularly in nations closer to the Middle East, with measures like closing borders and expelling refugees framed as defensive responses. Additionally, research analyzing media discourse during the 2015 refugee “crisis” in Europe (Chouliaraki & Zaborowski Reference Chouliaraki and Zaborowski2017) underscored the marginalization of refugee voices, reinforcing their invisibility and delegitimization in news narratives.

Furthermore, discourse analysis of Western and international news coverage highlighted a tendency to associate Syrian refugees with threat and criminality (Dykstra Reference Dykstra2016), while studies examining representation in European newspapers like The Guardian and El Pais (Romano & Porto Reference Romano, Porto, Filardo, Morales and Floyd2021) revealed contrasting frames emphasizing conflict and morality. Meanwhile, critical discourse analysis of coverage in newspapers from Turkey, Bulgaria, and the UK (Ozdora-Aksak et al Reference Ozdora-Aksak, Connolly-Ahern and Dimitrova2021) pointed to a lack of portrayal of refugees’ daily lives and aspirations, contributing to their dehumanization. According to a European media expert based in Beirut, these studies “[…] collectively illustrate the multifaceted ways in which media frames shape public perceptions of refugees, influenced by political ideologies, geographical proximity, and narratives of threat and dependency.” She further explains:

Across Western and international media, Ukrainian refugees are depicted as innocent bystanders caught in the crossfire of war, with emotive language and personal narratives highlighting their vulnerability and resilience. The media appeals to humanitarian values, emphasizing the moral imperative to assist those in need and galvanizing public support for refugee assistance programs (Diab Reference Diab2022a). In contrast, MENA refugees are often portrayed in a manner that emphasizes their otherness, using terms like “migrant crisis” and “invasion” to frame their arrival as a burden or threat, and in turn undermining efforts to foster understanding and empathy (Georgiou & Zaborowski Reference Georgiou and Zaborowski2017). The framing of MENA refugees as destabilizing forces perpetuate exclusionary rhetoric and justifies restrictive immigration and asylum policies, reinforcing barriers to their integration and inclusion (Sales Reference Sales2023; Klein Reference Klein2021; el-Nawawy & ElMasry Reference el-Nawawy and Elmasry2024; Wenzel & Żerkowska-Balas Reference Wenzel and Żerkowska-Balas2019). A political analyst from a Beirut-based think tank elaborates:

On the point of media complicity, during a public broadcast, CBS News senior foreign correspondent Charlie D’Agata remarked that Ukraine, “[…] isn’t a place, with all due respect, like Iraq or Afghanistan, that has seen conflict raging for decades. This is a relatively civilised, relatively European—I have to choose those words carefully, too—city, one where you wouldn’t expect that, or hope that it’s going to happen” (Bayoumi Reference Bayoumi2022). This comment sparked immediate public backlash, prompting D’Agata to issue a swift apology. Across the MENA region, this was particularly felt according to qualitative findings—as this form of racist reporting not only impacted public discourse, but further instilled a sense of hierarchy in vulnerability, and an overall sense of re-prioritization within the humanitarian space that once again, prioritized people based on their race and their perceived proximity to what one Syrian political analyst calls “Europe’s obsession with Whiteness,” she explains:

In another incident, during a broadcast interview with BBC, a former deputy prosecutor general of Ukraine expressed emotional distress, sharing “[…] it’s very emotional for me because I see European people with blue eyes and blond hair […] being killed every day.” Rather than challenging this statement, the BBC host responded with, “I understand and respect the emotion” (Arria Reference Arria2022). Similarly, on France’s BFMTV, journalist Phillipe Corbé remarked, “[…] we’re not talking here about Syrians fleeing the bombing of the Syrian regime backed by Putin. We’re talking about Europeans leaving in cars that look like ours to save their lives” (Ali Reference Ali2022). In The Telegraph, Daniel Hannan remarked, “[…] they seem so like us. That is what makes it so shocking. Ukraine is a European country. Its people watch Netflix and have Instagram accounts, vote in free elections and read uncensored newspapers. War is no longer something visited upon impoverished and remote populations” (Hannan Reference Hannan2022). On the evident shift and contradiction in media narratives and tones depending on the conflict they are covering, a Syrian reporter elaborates:

Incidents of racist reporting around the Ukrainian conflict persisted well into the first few weeks—often highlighting that “war” is exclusively associated with developing, third-world nations, overlooking Ukraine’s ongoing conflicts since 2014 as an example (Bock et al Reference Bock, Henneberg and Plank2015; Mykhnenko Reference Mykhnenko2014; Lakomy Reference Lakomy2016; Van Metre et al Reference Van Metre, Gienger and Kuehnast2015). Much of this reporting, further suggested that appearing “middle class” equates to being akin to an average European, White family (Ibid). On ITV, a journalist reporting from Poland remarked, “[…] now the unthinkable has happened to them. And this is not a developing, third world nation. This is Europe!” (Twaij Reference Twaij2022). According to a Palestinian-Syrian political and media analyst, a close look at previous reporting on refugee crises by the same outlets highlights a decidedly different reality:

BBC’s inconsistent coverage of refugee crises has been the subject of multiple debates examining the publication’s use of sources, its values, and its tone (Nielsen and Fletcher Reference Nielsen and Fletcher2023; UK Gov. Reference Gov2019).

Having said this, the BBC’s reporting has yet to be scrutinized and combed through to the extent this study aims to. Often, finding that refugees from the MENA region are depicted as passive in the narrative, that their reporting lacked participatory approaches for prolonged periods of time, and that refugees from the MENA were hardly even interviewed in person. In a study that examines all coverage of the Syrian conflict published between 2015 and 2016 in BBC Religion, Perreault and Paul (Reference Perreault and Paul2019) found that “[…] Syrian refugees were this voiceless group, one not even quoted by the news media, and yet were the subject of suspicion and even disdain by the powerful British government.” While this is a very specific period of reporting examined here, it importantly coincides with what the EU deemed the peak of its “migration crisis” (European Commission 2015; European Commission 2017; Peters et al Reference Peters2023), highlighting that reporting is not only complementary to existing political narratives and positionalities being perpetuated but once again served as a reinforcer of broader discourse surrounding certain vulnerable groups. According to a French political analyst whose work focuses on conflict zones in the North African region, this is “no coincidence” and “only goes to prove how much synergy there is between the media and political landscapes,” he explains:

A blatant example of a racist depiction of refugees occurred yet again on ITV’s flagship show, This Morning, when British media personality Matthew Wright expressed concern over the possibility of a thermobaric bomb being used in Europe, stating: “[…] the US has used a thermobaric bomb before in Afghanistan. But the idea of it being used in Europe is stomach-churning,” thereby highlighting the stark contrast in the perceived significance of European lives versus those in developing nations, particularly in the context of armed conflict (Syed Reference Syed2022). The juxtaposition of concern for European safety with a seemingly indifferent attitude toward the suffering of people in the Global South deemed less economically or politically significant exposes a troubling pattern of implicit bias and devaluation of lives based on geographic and cultural factors. CNN further adds to this narrative through a quote from Julia Ioffe, who underscores racial biases in perceptions of chemical attacks. Her statement, “[…] It’s one thing for sarin gas to be used on people in faraway Syria who are Muslim and of a different culture. What is Europe going to do when it is on European soil, done to Europeans?” exposes a double standard in how victims are perceived and treated based on their proximity to Western audiences and cultural backgrounds (The New Arab 2022).

Racist sentiments perpetuated by media representations of refugees have undoubtedly influenced public sentiment, as evidenced by disturbing remarks made by individuals in the public sphere. For instance, during an interview on the Spanish TV news channel La Sexta, a man articulated his perception of Ukrainian refugees in a manner reflective of deep-seated racial biases. He stated, “[…] these aren’t like the other children that we’ve become accustomed to seeing suffer on TV, these children are blond with blue eyes, [so] this is very important” (Khoudary Reference Khoudary2022). This statement not only underscores the racialized lens through which some individuals perceive suffering but also reveals the extent to which media and political narratives can and have both shaped and reinforced discriminatory attitudes. By highlighting the physical attributes of Ukrainian refugees, such as blond hair and blue eyes, as markers of worthiness or deservingness of sympathy, this comment exemplifies how racist tropes permeate public discourse, exacerbating divisions and fostering a sense of otherness and hierarchization based on racial characteristics.

How Wording Frames a ‘Crisis’: BBC as a Case Study

This disparity in terminology and wording adopted by media outlets and political actors underscores the complexities and nuances of the migration discourse within Europe. Media coverage of the EU’s “migration crisis” often portrayed it as a divisive issue within Europe, contrasting sharply with the depiction of the Ukrainian conflict as a unifying force for the continent, promoting a shared approach to integration and protection (BBC 2016b; Krastev & Leonard Reference Krastev and Leonard2023a; Tocci Reference Tocci2023). Interestingly, there was an overemphasis on the use of the term “European,” seemingly to incorporate Ukraine into a broader European narrative without it being part of the EU (Krastev & Leonard Reference Krastev and Leonard2023a; Krastev & Leonard Reference Krastev and Leonard2023b). While Ukraine is not officially part of the EU yet, there have been strong statements from EU politicians expressing solidarity and support for Ukraine’s eventual membership—a narrative evidently building toward the establishment of a more emotive stance toward Ukraine from the EU’s general public. Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission, said in 2022 that “[…] Ukraine belongs in the European Union,” (Anderson Reference Anderson2022). In June 2022, the EU granted Ukraine candidate status, which is a formal step toward eventual membership, albeit membership remains out of reach (Ruppert Reference Ruppert2023; Darvas et al Reference Darvas and Dabrowski2024; Malingre Reference Malingre2024; Valero & Krasnolutska Reference Valero and Krasnolutska2024). Furthermore, significant differences in language use and framing are evident in the comparison between phrases such as “sharing the burden” and “sharing the responsibility” (BBC 2016d; BBC 2016b; De Somer & Neidhardt Reference De Somer and Neidhardt2022; Linos Reference Linos2022). While the influx of Ukrainians reached into the hundreds of thousands, even millions at times, the label “migrant crisis” was applied to situations where comparatively smaller numbers, such as 9,000 (BBC 2015a) or 40,000 individuals (BBC 2015b), arrived at EU borders from MENA countries and from across the African continent.

An evident demonstration of the influential power of language and its implications can be discerned in the BBC’s reporting and framing of migration and asylum within the EU from 2015 to 2016 at the “migration crisis” peak. This encompassed an excessive focus on numerical data, not only inflating narratives surrounding these figures but also involving selective highlighting and downplaying of statistics to amplify perceived threats. Notably, the strategic use of temporal markers like “just a few months”’ or “in the last year alone” was employed to magnify the scale of arrivals within a condensed time frame, thereby fostering a sense of urgency and crisis. This narrative conveniently reinforced the portrayal of the EU as perpetually overwhelmed. Furthermore, the deliberate overuse of the term “crisis” in nearly every headline during this period perpetuated the notion of constant peril faced by the EU. Within this reporting, there was a discernible pattern of constructing stereotypical images of refugees and their journeys, reinforcing societal biases. Expressions such as “figures do not include those who got in undetected” and descriptions of arrivals in “flimsy rubber dinghies or small wooden boats” served to depict chaos and threat while reinforcing racial and socio-economic profiling of refugees (BBC 2016a). On this point, a Beirut-based Lebanese media analyst shares:

Crucially, this narrative remained remarkably consistent over time; it persisted unchanged not only in the immediate aftermath of MENA region conflicts but also three and even five years later. There was no discernible escalation in the emotive language used as these conflicts unfolded, nor did media coverage become more frequent or focused. Instead, coverage gradually shifted away from conflict-specific reporting, with many refugee groups from different conflicts, gradually assimilated into broader discussions on migration influxes from the Global South. Once again, they were collectively portrayed as a threat to EU security and stability. This underscores the notion that the conflict itself mattered less than the identities of the displaced individuals and their perceived trajectory, revealing broader patterns of framing and perception within media discourse. A political analyst from Syria explains:

Below is a tracking of the specific wording and terminology used by BBC in a sample of coverage of the EU’s “migration crisis” between 2015 and 2016:

Problematically, at the conclusion of its articles covering refugees from the MENA during this period, the BBC inserted the following note: “A note on terminology: The BBC uses the term ‘migrant’ to refer to all people on the move who have yet to complete the legal process of claiming asylum. This group includes people fleeing war-torn countries such as Syria, who are likely to be granted refugee status, as well as people who are seeking jobs and better lives, who governments are likely to rule are economic migrants.” (BBC 2016a; BBC 2016c; BBC 2015b).

Table 3. Media monitoring, 2015

Table 4. Media monitoring, 2016

This note reveals several significant points: not only does it echo the EU’s deliberate use of the blanket term “migrant” to diminish its responsibility toward MENA refugees and evade commitments to providing them protection and non-refoulement, but it also portrays them as individuals unworthy of sympathy until the EU deems them deserving, in a clear effort to adopt a “guilty until proven refugee” approach (Diab Reference Diab2022b). In contrast, reporting on Ukrainians did not include such a note at the end of articles even once regardless of the period of coverage; they were consistently referred to as refugees without dispute throughout the coverage. This discrepancy reinforces the narrative of the EU and its stance, which did not require Ukrainians to prove their refugee status or entitlement to protection—they were automatically recognized as refugees without question, by the political class first, and by the media second (BBC 2024; Farmer Reference Farmer2024; Taylor Reference Taylor2024; Campbell & Cleak Reference Campbell and Cleak2024).

In a sample of its coverage of refugees from Ukraine, BBC used the following emotive phrases and headlines to describe their entry into Europe and their displacement between 2022 and 2023:

Importantly, Ukrainian refugees were thoroughly interviewed and visually depicted throughout the coverage on them, in stark contrast to other coverage focusing on refugees from the MENA region. While the former are subject to meticulous interviewing and comprehensive coverage, the latter often encounter a dearth of such substantive engagement. This contrast not only reflects a nuanced manifestation of media bias but also holds profound implications for reader engagement and empathetic connection. Through the lens of media psychology, in-depth interviews with subjects, and their visual framing, contribute significantly to their humanization within news narratives (Zhang & Hellmueller Reference Zhang and Hellmueller2017; Azevedo et al Reference Azevedo, De Beukelaer and Jones2021; Martikainen & Sakki Reference Martikainen and Sakki2023). Such interviews and visual framings provide a platform for refugees to share their experiences, perspectives, and aspirations, thereby fostering a sense of relatability and empathy among audiences. Conversely, the absence of thorough interrogation and representation in coverage can perpetuate stereotypical depictions and contribute to the dehumanization of refugee populations.

Table 5. Media monitoring, 2022

Table 6. Media monitoring, 2023

Furthermore, drawing from social cognitive theory, it can be argued that the quality and depth of media coverage play a pivotal role in shaping audience perceptions and attitudes toward marginalized groups (Medianu Reference Medianu2014; Ghanim & Abed Reference Ghanim and Abed2023; Khan et al Reference Khan, Jahangir and Khan2023). By affording Ukrainian refugees extensive interview coverage, media outlets facilitate a cognitive and emotional bond between readers and the subjects of the narrative (Ibid). Using pull quotes such as “we run because we have to” (as though no one else has ever had to) (Moreland Reference Moreland2022a), and “we’re one extended family now,” (Ball & Wade Reference Ball and Wade2022) further serves in the creation of this bond. In contrast, the limited representation of MENA refugees diminishes the potential for empathetic connection, thereby exacerbating the psychological distance between readers and the individuals being portrayed.

An important evolution in reporting regarding Ukrainian refugees in the EU is the empowerment and overemphasis of these individuals as primary storytellers in the media through interviews, signifying a commendable shift toward participatory journalism (BBC 2022d; BBC 2022e; BBC 2022i; Ghobadi Reference Ghobadi2022; BBC 2022j; BBC 2022k; Thierij Reference Theirij2022; Moreland Reference Moreland2022a; BBC 2022m; Brooks & Murray Reference Brooks and Murray2022; BBC 2022nn); Booth & Harby Reference Booth and Harby2023; O’Grady Reference O’Grady2023; Media & Airey Reference Media and Airey2023; Pound-Woods Reference Pound-Woods2023). However, this empowering trend, while noteworthy, faces limitations in its applicability beyond the Ukrainian context, thereby posing challenges to achieving broader inclusivity in representing diverse refugee experiences. This disparity is particularly evident when contrasting the empowered voices of Ukrainians with the marginalized narratives from the MENA region. While the unprecedented participatory approach to reporting empowers Ukrainians as primary storytellers, its impact remains largely confined to the Ukrainian context. This confinement potentially undermines its broader influence and relevance across diverse cultural and geopolitical landscapes. Unlike Ukrainian refugees, individuals from the MENA region have not been afforded a similar platform, thus depriving them of the opportunity to authentically represent themselves or shape narratives about their communities and experiences.

Reporting went beyond this, to insist on framing Ukrainian refugees’ seemingly easy and smooth integration into the EU—once again, reinforcing the political narrative of “they’re just like us” and part of a “European way of life” (Bayoumi Reference Bayoumi2022; Malik Reference Malik2022; BBC 2023c; Cerys Reference Cerys2023). They did this by highlighting their professions and hireability, and ultimately, giving them even more humanizing characteristics (BBC 2023b). On multiple occasions, BBC went to great lengths to frame Ukrainian refugees as “dancers” (Vandy Reference Vandy2022; Vandy Reference Vandy2023; Bryson & Jaiyeola Reference Bryson and Jaiyeola2023), to frame a female Ukrainian musician as a “young, talented refugee” who was “still waiting for a visa” (BBC 2022n). The article’s headline read “Ukrainian refugee with Royal College of Music scholarship in visa limbo” (Ibid). In fact, “musicians” and “singers” formed part of multiple headlines (Brooks & Murray Reference Brooks and Murray2022; O’Hare Reference O’Hare2022; Duggan Reference Duggan2023; BBC 2022p; Cox Reference Cox2023; Bullock & Miller Reference Bullock and Miller2023). Beyond this, Ukrainians were framed as butchers (Lonsdale & Johnston Reference Lonsdale and Johnston2023), translators (BBC 2023a; Messenger Reference Messenger2023), dry-cleaners (O’Grady Reference O’Grady2023), artists (Zaccaro & Moore Reference Zaccaro and Moore2023; Earp & Liggins Reference Earp and Liggins2023), chefs (BBC 2022o), bus drivers (Gupta & PA News Reference Gupta and News2023) and business owners (Brewer Reference Brewer2023; Humphrey & White Reference Humphrey and White2023).

Reporting on Ukrainian refugees was further observingly covered through an undertone of temporal “urgency”—a sense of urgency once again reinforced by EU politicians. This is evident in the number of times “delays,” “waits,” and “issues” in visa processes made the headlines between 2022 and 2023 (BBC 2022w; BBC 2022x; BBC 2022z; Foran Reference Foran2022; Bird Reference Bird2022; Johal & Phipps Reference Johal and Phipps2022; BBC 2022ab; BBC 2022ad; BBC 2022r; BBC 2022s; BBC 2022v; BBC 2022ae). Some of the most emotive headlines read: “[…] visa process wakes me in middle of the night” (Schofield & Cooper Reference Schofield and Cooper2022), and “[…] family’s ‘torturous’ wait for a UK visa” whilst describing the “weeks-long” wait before a Ukrainian refugee family a British woman was sponsoring received visas to travel (Lee Reference Lee2022). In other articles and their headlines, visa processing periods were described as “an obstacle course” (BBC 2022u), and their “silence” was described as “unwelcoming” (BBC 2022t). In other coverage, visa processes were described as “beyond lengthy” whilst covering one Ukrainian refugee’s “weeks for permission to enter the UK” (Moreland Reference Moreland2022b). The UK visa process was described as “dehumanising” on a separate occasion (BBC 2022b), and in multiple reports, criticized for its long waiting periods (BBC 2022y), resulting in Ukrainians living in “limbo” and in “a race against time” to get visas (BBC 2022tt; Manning & Bell, Reference Manning and Bell2022). The number of hours it took one Ukrainian refugee to fill out her visa forms even warranted its own headline. (BBC 2022aa)

Importantly, politicians once again reinforce this framing, ultimately apologizing for waiting periods, and insisting that processes are either too long or not efficient enough (BBC 2022pp; BBC 2022q). In an interview with BBC Nicola Sturgeon, Member of the Scottish Parliament, described the number of visas granted as “woefully small” and “not good enough,” further insisting that “[…] the process of translating applications into visas is unacceptably slow,” and that “[…] the UK government is letting the people of Ukraine down and also letting down people across Scotland who have opened their homes” (BBC 2022ac). In a separate incident, Lord Harrington of Watford, UK Minister of State for Refugees, described the visa application forms as “too long” to fill in and shared that the government was working to shorten the process (Turner Reference Turner2022). For her part, Home Secretary Priti Patel apologized “with frustration” about delays in the Ukraine refugee visa process (BBC 2022pp). A media analyst from Jordan weighs in on this cycle of reinforcement, insisting:

Significantly, the sympathetic disposition toward the plight of displaced Ukrainians entering the EU not only remained steadfast from its inception but also notably intensified. This culminated in a profound sense of obligation among European hosts, whose commendable acts were lauded and even encouraged by the media, underscoring the emergence of a narrative wherein hosting Ukrainians in private residences became a symbol of humanitarian duty (BBC 2022af; Ellis Reference Ellis2022; Collinson & Polachowska Reference Collinson and Polachowska2022; Pearson Reference Pearson2023; Hinman Reference Hinman2023; Heath Reference Heath2023; Jenkins & Morgan Reference Jenkins and Morgan2023; Waple & Leyland Reference Waple and Leyland2023; Bennet Reference Bennett2023). Notably, this narrative found reinforcement through the actions of politicians who publicly welcomed refugees into their own homes, thereby adding further weight to the prevailing narrative of solidarity (BBC 2022ad; Faulkner Reference Faulkner2022). Conversely, the treatment of Europeans aiding or sheltering refugees from the MENA region diverged sharply in media discourse. Such individuals were often depicted as transgressors, criminalized for their acts of rescuing “migrants” (Kirby Reference Kirby2023). This portrayal, persistently eschewing the term “refugee,” perpetuates the very cycle of reinforcement that this paper endeavors to illuminate (Ibid).